Legal Challenges ‘Teed Up’ After Virginia Voters Approve ‘Egregious’ Redistricting Referendum

Original article here

Virginia voters on Tuesday approved a redistricting referendum that would allow Democrats to re-draw the state’s congressional maps from a 6-to-5 advantage to 10-to-1 majority, disenfranchising potentially millions of Republican voters ahead of the 2026 midterms.

The measure, framed deceptively on the ballot as a vote “to restore fairness in the upcoming elections,” passed narrowly by a margin of 51.5 percent to 48.5 percent.

According to the Virginia Department of Elections, “yes” voters won the early voting contest 567,077 to 509,572, while the “no” vote had the advantage on Election Day 894,819 to 791,814.

However, the “yes” mail-in votes blew the no’s out of the water, 216,380 to 81,817.

Multiple lawsuits challenging the legality of the constitutional amendment have already been brought and oral arguments before the Virginia Supreme Court are tentatively scheduled for Monday.

Carl Cannon, the Washington editor of RealClearPolitics, said the Virginia Redistricting Referendum will eventually be challenged in the US Supreme Court.

“The courts usually give pretty wide leeway on referendum language, but this is so egregious,” Cannon opined during the RCP podcast, Tuesday evening. “It says ‘to restore fairness.’ This is Orwellian language intended to deceive voters.”

Democrats such as Governor Abigail Spanberger, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, and former President Barack Obama supported the “Yes” campaign, framing it as a defense of fair elections.

Spanberger, who told voters last year she had no plans to redistrict the state, said: “Virginia voters have spoken, and tonight they pushed back against a President who claims he is ‘entitled’ to more Republican seats in Congress.”

The governor continued: “As we watched other states go along with those demands without voter input, Virginians refused to let that stand. We responded the right way: at the ballot box.”

Virginia Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell (D) said that “fairness won. Accountability won. And the Commonwealth that gave America its Constitution has once again reminded the nation what that Constitution is for.”

Obama, who strenuously called for an end to redistricting ten years ago,  congratulated Virginia on X and thanked voters “for showing us what it looks like to stand up for our democracy and fight back.”

Jeffries (D-N.Y.) posted on X that “House Democrats have crushed Donald Trump’s national gerrymandering scheme,” adding, “Maximum warfare, everywhere, all the time.”

Former Vice President Kamala Harris said that Virginians have sent President Trump and the Republican Party a “clear message.”

“Donald Trump and Republicans have tried to rig the 2026 midterms,” Harris wrote in a post on X. “Today in Virginia, voters sent them a clear message: The power is with the people,” she added.

Republicans say Virginia’s redistricting is different from other efforts like in Texas, because Democrats are amending the state’s constitution.

Former Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R), who previously said the new map was “the result of a process that’s unconstitutional and illegal,” said in a statement on X, “Thank you to all the voters who turned out to vote against this egregious power grab. The race was much closer than the left expected because Virginians know a 10-1 map is not Virginia.”

“I urge the Virginia Supreme Court to rule against this unconstitutional process that will disenfranchise millions of Virginians,”  Youngkin added.

Former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli (R) posted on X that “the legal fight is just beginning.”

He said four Virginia constitutional challenges are “teed up,” with three challenges to the amendment process itself.

1️⃣ First passage was invalid. The amendment was taken up during a special session convened in 2024 for budget purposes. The General Assembly’s own call to the Governor (under Art. IV, §6 and Art. V, §5) and its governing resolution (HJR 6001) limited the session’s scope. Expanding it to include a constitutional amendment on redistricting required a two-thirds vote that never occurred. A Tazewell County judge found this action “void, ab initio.”
2️⃣ Art. XII, §1 requires that after first passage, a proposed amendment be “referred to the General Assembly at its first regular session held after the next general election of members of the House of Delegates.” An election must intervene between first and second passage. Here, first passage occurred during an election cycle — not before an intervening one.
3️⃣ Art. XII, §1 requires the amendment be submitted to voters “not sooner than ninety days after final passage by the General Assembly.” The timeline from second passage to the April 21 vote did not satisfy this requirement.
Plus ONE challenge to the proposed maps:
4️⃣ Art. II, §6 requires that “every electoral district shall be composed of contiguous and compact territory.” The proposed congressional maps violate this contiguity requirement (rather badly).

“Next stop, court. Stay tuned,” he wrote.